Circle of Greats 1979 Balloting Part 3

This post is for voting and discussion in the 140th round of balloting for the Circle of Greats (COG).  This is the last of three rounds of balloting adds to the list of candidates eligible to receive your votes those players born in 1979. Rules and lists are after the jump.

The new group of 1979-born players, in order to join the eligible list, must, as usual, have played at least 10 seasons in the major leagues or generated at least 20 Wins Above Replacement (“WAR”, as calculated by baseball-reference.com, and for this purpose meaning 20 total WAR for everyday players and 20 pitching WAR for pitchers). This group of 1979-born candidates, comprising those with R-Z surnames, joins the eligible holdovers from previous rounds to comprise the full list of players eligible to appear on your ballots.

In addition to voting for COG election among players on the main ballot, there will be also be voting for elevation to the main ballot among players on the secondary ballot. For the main ballot election, voters must select three and only three eligible players, with the one player appearing on the most ballots cast in the round inducted into the Circle of Greats. For the secondary ballot election, voters may select up to three eligible players, with the one player appearing on the most ballots cast elevated to the main ballot for the next COG election round. In the case of ties, a runoff election round will be held for COG election, while a tie-breaking process will be followed to determine the secondary ballot winner.

Players who fail to win either ballot but appear on half or more of the ballots that are cast win four added future rounds of ballot eligibility. Players who appear on 25% or more of the ballots cast, but less than 50%, earn two added future rounds of ballot eligibility. One additional round of eligibility is earned by any player who appears on at least 10% of the ballots cast or, for the main ballot only, any player finishing in the top 9 (including ties) in ballot appearances. Holdover candidates on the main ballot who exhaust their eligibility will drop to the secondary ballot for the next COG election round, as will first time main ballot candidates who attract one or more votes but do not earn additional main ballot eligibility. Secondary ballot candidates who exhaust their eligibility will drop from that ballot, but will become eligible for possible reinstatement in a future Redemption round election.

All voting for this round closes at 11:59 PM EST Sunday, February 25th, while changes to previously cast ballots are allowed until 11:59 PM EST Friday, February 23rd.

If you’d like to follow the vote tally, and/or check to make sure I’ve recorded your vote correctly, you can see my ballot-counting spreadsheet for this round here: COG 1979 Part 3 Vote Tally. I’ll be updating the spreadsheet periodically with the latest votes. Initially, there is a row in the spreadsheet for every voter who has cast a ballot in any of the past rounds, but new voters are entirely welcome — new voters will be added to the spreadsheet as their ballots are submitted. Also in the spreadsheet is a column for each of the holdover candidates; additional player columns from the new born-in-1979 group will be added to the spreadsheet as votes are cast for them.

Choose your three players, for both the main and secondary ballots, from the lists below of eligible players. The current holdovers are listed in order of the number of future rounds (including this one) through which they are assured eligibility, and alphabetically when the future eligibility number is the same. The 1979 birth-year players are listed below in order of the number of seasons each played in the majors, and alphabetically among players with the same number of seasons played.

Holdovers:

MAIN BALLOT ELIGIBILITY SECONDARY BALLOT ELIGIBILITY
Dick Allen 9 rounds Billy Williams 5 rounds
Vladimir Guerrero 6 rounds Bobby Abreu 4 rounds
David Ortiz 4 rounds Ken Boyer 4 rounds
Gary Sheffield 3 rounds Richie Ashburn 2 rounds
Luis Tiant 3 rounds Stan Coveleski 2 rounds
Bobby Wallace 3 rounds Andre Dawson 2 rounds
Ted Lyons 2 rounds Don Drysdale 2 rounds
Willie Randolph 2 rounds Andruw Jones 2 rounds
Scott Rolen 2 rounds Monte Irvin 2 rounds
Todd Helton this round ONLY Don Sutton 2 rounds
Minnie Minoso this round ONLY Reggie Smith this round ONLY
Ted Simmons this round ONLY    
Chase Utley this round ONLY    

Everyday Players (born in 1979, R-Z surname, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Juan Uribe
Jayson Werth
Ramón Santiago
Carlos Ruiz
Josh Willingham
Kevin Youkilis

Pitchers (born in 1979, R-Z surname, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Rafael Soriano
Chris Young
Johan Santana
Wandy Rodríguez
Brad Ziegler
Juan Rincón
Brandon Webb

As is our custom, here are quiz questions for each of the new players on the ballot.
1. Juan Uribe played over 15 post-season games at both SS and 3B. Which other player has done the same? (Manny Machado)
2. Jayson Werth posted 1.361 OPS for the Phillies in the 2008 World Series. Which Phillie outfielder posted a higher OPS in a single World Series (min. 15 PA)? (Lenny Dykstra, 1993)
3. Ramón Santiago’s 59 OPS+ in 2003 is tied with several players for the lowest mark by a Tiger in a qualified season (modern definition). Which of those players recorded the lowest career OPS+ among All-Stars with 5000+ PA careers? (Ed Brinkman)
4. Carlos Ruiz teamed with Cole Hamels to form the most durable battery in Phillies history, with 207 regular season starts together. Whose franchise record did Ruiz and Hamels break? (Pete Alexander/Bill Killefer, 191 starts)
5. Josh Willingham recorded 5 qualified seasons in his career, all of them with 20 HR, 25 doubles, 50 walks and 10 HBP, and is the only player to post such seasons for four different franchises. Which player recorded the most such seasons in a career? (Carlos Delgado, 1998-2007)
6. Kevin Youkilis recorded consecutive 400+ PA seasons (2009-10) slashing .300/.400/.500 for Boston. Which player recorded the longest streak of such seasons by a Red Sox first baseman? (Mo Vaughn, 1996-98)
7. Rafael Soriano is one of seven pitchers to record a 40 save season for three different franchises. Who was the first pitcher to do this? (Jeff Reardon, 1991)
8. Chris Young is one of eight Padre pitchers to record consecutive seasons with 30 starts and 3 WAR. Which two of those pitchers accomplished this feat in the same seasons? (Bruce Hurst/Ed Whitson, 1989-90)
9. Johan Santana is the only pitcher with three consecutive seasons (2004-06) leading his league in WHIP, ERA+ and SO/9. Which pitcher recorded the most seasons leading his league in all three of those categories? (Pedro Martinez, 5 seasons)
10. Brad Ziegler is the only pitcher with top 10 career ranks in ERA, ERA+ and HR/9, among retired relievers with 500+ game careers. Ziegler’s 390 ERA+ in 2008 is the best in any 50+ IP debut season. Which pitcher has the top ERA+ in a 50+ IP rookie season? (Rob Murphy, 1986)
11. Wandy Rodríguez recorded a 37 point improvement in his ERA+ from his first three seasons to his next three campaigns, the fourth largest such increase among starting pitchers with 300+ IP in both periods and with ERA+ under 90 in the first. Which of those pitchers recorded the largest such ERA+ improvement? (Jake Arrieta, 73 points)
12. Juan Rincón recorded four straight 70+ IP seasons (2003-06) for Minnesota. Which pitcher recorded the only longer streak of such seasons by a Twins reliever? (Al Worthington, 1964-68)
13. Brandon Webb posted a qualified 125 ERA+ in each of his first six seasons. Which other modern era pitcher did the same? (Mordecai Brown, 1903-10)

And, a couple of unanswered quiz questions from last week’s post.
14. Dan Johnson posted 7 consecutive seasons (2008-15) of 40 or fewer games, playing first base in all of them. Which player has the only longer streak of such seasons? (Russ Morman, 8 consecutive seasons 1988-91, 1994-97)
15. Jon Garland was a CG winner in his first post-season game, allowing 2 runs on 4 hits. Who is the last pitcher to allow more than 2 runs in a CG win in his post-season debut? (Gaylord Perry, 1971 NLCS)

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

209 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago

I propose that after this round, we have a 2nd Chance round. A ballot where anyone who has ever stayed for more than one round on the main or secondary ballots is given a chance to get back into the discussion. Just in the last two weeks we have lost Berkman and Nettles. Perhaps the system is perfect as it is, and the guys who have fallen off are right where they should be. But as we are not as active as we used to be, it would give us something to do, while we still have the momentum of… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago

Johan certainly has a case for the COG, even with 51.7 WAR. Averaged 7.1 WAR over his 5 year peak. 23rd in WAR7adj, tied with Spahn and Vance (Top 7 seasons, stat maxes out seasons at 250 IP, to neutralize the 19th century innings monsters). Only 16 pitchers have more top 5 CY votes. In his peak from 2004-2008, he was arguably the greatest pitcher in the world, as that half decade was at the tail end of the careers of Clemens, R Johnson, Schilling, and Pedro. Here is the bottom of the WAR list for our COG Starting Pitchers:… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

On Santana: A quick glance at his career and stats makes him appear superficially similar to Koufax: Not as erratic early on, breakout season as a starter at age 25, performing exceptionally for seven years to Sandy’’s six, career truncated by injury. Lots of strikeouts, excellent FIP and WHIP. He was a better pitcher in his early twenties than Koufax was, but went out with his career in somewhat of a decline, whereas Koufax retired at his peak. The fact that he spent just one year in the HOF ballot sweepstakes strikes me as an absurdity, even given the relative… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
5 months ago

Wonderful analysis, nsb, as usual. It’s good to see you and Voomo going at in-depth analysis and advocacy, which is what made CoG voting strings so interesting.

Doug
Doug
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Santana definitely requires you to think whether “greatness” is best measured by peak value or cumulative career value. Adam Darowski’s Hall of Stats uses a methodology to distinguish these two components of greatness, and then combines the two into a single score. In Santana’s case, that score is 108 (where 100 = HoF-worthy), with 64% of the score resulting from peak performance. Sandy Koufax scores 102, with 54% resulting from peak performance. Adam announced at the end of December that he will no longer be updating the Hall of Stats database. The above link is a database archive current to… Read more »

Last edited 5 months ago by Doug
Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago

# 4) Robin Roberts/Stan Lopata ? (Carlton didn’t like pitching to Boone and preferred McCarver – I just don’t think McCarver played enough with the Phillies)

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
5 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Here’s what I came up with:
Carlton/Boone 146 games
Roberts/Lopata 136 games
Roberts/Seminick 126 games

Doug
Doug
5 months ago

It’s none of those.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

How about Lonborg/Boone, 155 games?

Doug
Doug
5 months ago

Not them.

Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Pete Alexander and Bill Killefer 1911-1917? (and then some more with the Cubs)

Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

The Phillies threw away Jenkins and Sandberg. And, their hands were sort of forced when they dealt Allen and Rolen to the Cards….

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Doug: I came up with 199 games for Alexander/Killefer.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

I did more research and then realized that 199 games is in error and the answer is what you found. I created a spreadsheet that identifies starting batteries but something is awry.

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
5 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

I found 149 games for Carlton/McCarver

Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago
Reply to  Scary Tuna

Tuna,
All with the Phillies? or some STL?

Doug
Doug
5 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Only with the Phils.

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
5 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Yes, as Doug mentioned, I only looked at their time together with the Phillies.

Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago

#2) Lenny “Nails” Dykstra in 1993 (1.413)

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
5 months ago

For #7 I got Jeff Reardon who did it while on the Red Sox in1991

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
5 months ago

Answer to #12 is Al Worthington with 5 straight seasons.1964-1968.

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
5 months ago

#10: Jonathan Papelbon

Doug
Doug
5 months ago
Reply to  Scary Tuna

You would certainly think Papelbon’s 517 ERA+ would have to be the best. But there’s another rookie season even better.

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Finally found it: Rob Murphy in 1986.

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
5 months ago

#9: Pedro Martinez with five? Walter Johnson is the only other pitcher I have found with even three such seasons.

Doug
Doug
5 months ago
Reply to  Scary Tuna

Pedro is correct. I think the totals are:
5 – Pedro
3 – Santana, Walter Johnson
2 – Vance, Seaver, Randy Johnson
1 – Waddell, Alexander, Grove, Newhouser, Koufax, Kershaw, Dutch Leonard, Hippo Vaughn, Harry Brecheen, Mike Scott

Last edited 5 months ago by Doug
Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago

#6) Mo Vaughn 1996-98 (with a 152 OPS+ to boot)

Doug
Doug
5 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Vaughn is correct.

Which contemporary of Vaughn bested his feat as a first baseman, with 5 such consecutive seasons including, like Vaughn, 150 OPS+ and 35+ HR each year?

Last edited 5 months ago by Doug
Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Frank Thomas?

Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Frank Thoams was doing a Ted Williams imitation for a while there. Interesting that both 1995 league MVP’s, Vaughn and Larkin, had better seasons in 1996 and didn’t get a single first place vote for MVP between them

Doug
Doug
5 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Nothing against Vaughn. He had a fine season in ’95, but had no business beating out Thomas and, especially, Albert Belle for MVP. Thomas was the 2-time defending MVP and, since his numbers were down from ’94 when he just plain unconscious, I can sort of see why voters would shy away from him. But, Belle? 103 XBH, 377 TB, only 50 double/50 HR season ever, and all in a short season, and he was even almost league average defensively (-1 Rfld). So, maybe he was a bit of a jerk, but is that a reason to jerk him around… Read more »

Last edited 5 months ago by Doug
Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

In 1995, Jayson Stark (who’s actually a real nice guy and fan of the game) wrote sort of a “Nah-Nah” article about Albert’s “pretty numbers” and his failure to treat people (i.e. Sportswriters/The Voters) in a humane fashion and the apparent consequences.

Supposedly, Belle was very intelligent but was either on a steroid cycle or just had a loose screw…..”but, hey, I’m no doctor”. He had a few years putting up incredible numbers with the Tribe – and at least one with CWS as well

Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago

#5) Anthony Rizzo with six (?)

Doug
Doug
5 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Not Rizzo.

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

How about Frank Robinson?

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

I was surprised that someone had more than Robinson’s seven. But Carlos Delgado had far more, with ten consecutive seasons.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
5 months ago

Answer to #1: Manny Machado

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
5 months ago

Doug mentioned Adam Darowski’s Hall of Stats rankings in a great discussion thread on Johann Santana above, with arguments from Voomo and nsb. Adam (who posted here a few times, as I recall) evaluates players on the basis of a formula weighing peak measures against cumulative statistics, arriving at a single number, as Doug mentions. For context of scale, Ruth is at the top with 399. Six players break 300; 25 more break 200; 36 more break 150. Anyone with a score of 100 or more is in Adam’s “Hall of Stats” and has a ranking. There are 242 members.… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
5 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob: One of the unfortunate results of baseball fandom turning blindly to interpretive statistics as the ultimate source of judgment—an awkward beginning, but let it stand—one of those results is that reasoned discussion and arguable disagreement are stifled. Don’t have to look at the details of a player’s career, don’t have to judge him critically, don’t need to know his biography or his teams’ histories during his playing career, don’t need even to know the difference among eras, dead ball, live ball, steroid, and all the others. Just need to know WAR. Somewhere in the works of Thomas Wolfe there’s… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago

Can you re-write that line about Mariano? I don’t understand..

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

I think nsb’s point is that, great as Wilhelm’s knuckler was, it had an enormous downside (so to speak) in terms of generating PBs that affected game outcomes, whereas Rivera’s cutter did not.

I remember that the Orioles provided Wilhelm’s catcher, Gus Triandos, with a hugely oversize mitt at one point. The goal wasn’t to catch the knuckler, just to block it.

Great stat on Drysdale vs. Koufax. Fans of Brooklyn–even once they started playing home games away–were well aware of this contrast.

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Got it. It was a comparison to Wilhelm.

no statistician but
no statistician but
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Voomo: Wilhelm’s passed ball numbers, according to observers during his career (although admittedly, I have no source for this observation except my own aged memory) were understated, but even given the data as is, Rivera’s battery mates allowed a mere10.9 percent as many. I just picked Rivera for comparison because he’s regarded as the premier reliever of all-time by numerous informed observers. Gossage may be a better match. In 1800 innings he suffered 17 passed balls compared to 271 in 2250 for Wilhelm or 9.4 percent. All three were relief pitchers (although Wilhelm and Gossage each spent one season as… Read more »

DanMac
DanMac
4 months ago

Great comment. Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
5 months ago

For the unanswered question 14 of the prior posting I came up with Gaylord Perry in game 1 of the 1971 NLCS as the Giants defeated the Pirates 5-4.

Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago

#3 above sounds an awful lot like Eddie Brinkman at 65 OPS+ (also, he had a 59 OPS+ TWICE with the Tigers in qualified seasons). But, just a guess, as I couldn’t recollect any hitters in Tigers’ history that bad…..

Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago

#8) Bruce Hurst & Ed Whitson in 1989 , 1990.
Whitson led the NL in pitching WAR (7.0) in 1990 while going 14-9…. he was no match for Doug Drabek at 22-6 and garnered ZERO votes let alone any first-place votes

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

I’m sure you all know this but it’s amazing enough to bear repeating.

Hurst was the first left-handed Red Sox pitcher to win a world series game since Babe Ruth.

And an anagram of his name is:
B Ruth Curse

Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Never heard that one – Thanks!!

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago

Vote:

Minnie Minoso
Willie Randolph
Johan Santana

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago

Vote:

Secondary

Ashburn
Covlelski
Andruw Jones

Andruw Jones had an 11 year peak in which he averaged
157 Games
33 HR
100 RBI

5.5 WAR
22 rField

Arguably the greatest defensive CF ever.

opal611
opal611
5 months ago

For the 1979 – Part 3 election, I’m voting for:

-Vladimir Guerrero
-Todd Helton
-Willie Randolph

Other top candidates I considered highly (and/or will consider in future rounds):

-Rolen
-Utley
-Tiant
-Allen
-Wallace
-Lyons
-Sheffield

Quick Note: Should Brandon Webb have been listed as one of the new candidates for this selection? I would not be voting for him, but it looks like he had a 33.0 WAR.

Thanks!

Doug
Doug
4 months ago
Reply to  opal611

You’re absolutely right, Opal. Brandon should be on the list. Sorry I missed him.

I’m guessing Webb would not have been the winner of the round but, since he arguably could have attracted a vote with that WAR total, I’ll keep him on the ballot for our next round.

opal611
opal611
5 months ago

For the Secondary Ballot, I’m voting for:

-Don Sutton
-Andre Dawson
-Andruw Jones

Thanks!

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
5 months ago

For reasons discussed above, I’m going to vote the Modified-Historical Party ticket: Bobby Wallace Ted Lyons Luis Tiant nsb has been calling for nuance in CoG decisions, and I’m going to be singlemindedly focused on nuance in presenting another iteration of The Case For Bobby Wallace. 1) My nuanced case for Wallace’s stats: Among eligible candidates he’s at the top of the WAR chart (76.4 — better than half the CoG membership) and the top candidate according to The Hall of Stats (see above). 2) My nuanced case for Wallace within his era: a pretty-good-pitcher-turned-virtuoso-shortstop (and above-average-batter), Wallace is the… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
5 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,
Quite nuanced, indeed.
I have to belive that “Scott” of the 1884 B’more Monumentals refers to a surname. The “Scott” moniker as a first name really has only caught hold in the last 60 years or so. Beam me up….

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Paul, I’m sure you’ll recall that the 1871 Rockford Forest Cities were managed by the 24 year-old Scott Hastings, said to be the inventor of catcher hand signals. Hastings was still playing professionally as late as 1887 and could easily have been the Monumental Scott of 1884, especially if he’d shaved his prominent moustache in order to play in the Union Association incognito. This is certainly a topic worthy of further research. Since Hastings’s first name was officially Winfield (the things we do to children!) I have to acknowledge a lapse in not considering the possibility that “Scott” was neither… Read more »

Doug
Doug
5 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Interesting that Dreyfuss made the remark in 1911. As the Pirates owner, he presumably had not seen much of Wallace’s play since his NL days, which had ended ten years earlier. I suppose since his man Wagner was still going strong at 37, he assumed the same of Wallace, who was the same age.

Last edited 5 months ago by Doug
koma
koma
5 months ago

Main Ballot;
Vladimir Guerrero
David Ortiz
Minnie Minoso

Secondary Ballot:
Bobby Abreu
Ken Boyer

Chris C
Chris C
5 months ago

I sort of forgot about this site for a while. I’m happy to see the COG is still going.

Main Ballot: Ortiz, Sheffield, Santana
Secondary: Sutton

Doug
Doug
5 months ago
Reply to  Chris C

Welcome back Chris.

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago

On the subject of reducing everything to one statistic, here is a stat I created called PaWaa (Plate Appearances per Win Above Average). It another way of looking at WAR,but Ive also broken it down in to PaWaa2000, PaWaa5000, PaWaa7000, PaWaa8000, PaWaa9000, PaWaa10000, and PaWaa11000… …as a way of looking at players in the first xxxx# of PA in their career. This is to give perspective to careers like Albert Pujols, whose perceived greatness was diminished by longevity. This list is probably not complete. And I just updated it for the first time since 2015, without going through Every one… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

PaWaa – Career – Minimum 2000 PA   84.4 … (10622) Babe Ruth 97.2 … (9480) Rogers Hornsby 102.1 … (12606) Barry Bonds 102.5 … (6521) Mike Trout*** 104.0 … (9788) Ted Williams 113.5 … (12496) Willie Mays 118.5 … (5404) Jose Ramirez*** 122.2 … (3619) Aaron Judge*** 124.0 … (5757) Mookie Betts*** 123.1 … (9663) Lou Gehrig 125.7 … (9907) Mickey Mantle 127.7 … (11748) Honus Wagner 128.5 … (13084) Ty Cobb 135.8 … (11992) Tris Speaker 137.3 … (10062) Mike Schmidt 138.9 … (2084) Red Ruffing 140.5 … (7673) Joe DiMaggio 141.3 … (5695) Joe Jackson 147.3 … (5804) Jackie Robinson… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

PaWaa 2000 74.3 … Babe Ruth 104.5 … Mike Trout 105.9 … Joe Jackson 109.1 … Stan Musial 111.6 … Ted Williams 113.2 … Willie McCovey 116.2 … Rogers Hornsby 113.7 … Willie Mays 127.3 … Kenny Lofton 127.6 … Lou Gehrig 133.4 … Red Ruffing 135.4 … Aaron Judge 135.6 … Bobby Grich 136.1 … Cal Ripken 137.0 … Johnny Mize 137.4 … Mookie 137.5 … Mike Schmidt 139.5 … Albert Pujols 142.5 … Mike Piazza 143.4 … Wade Boggs 146.5 … Alex Rod 147.5 … Jimmie Foxx 154.4 … Chase Utley 155.5 … Carlton Fisk (took him 7… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

PaWaa 5000  77.6 … Babe Ruth 93.8 … Ted Williams 96.0 … Mike Trout 97.9 … Rogers Hornsby 103.0 … Mickey Mantle 108.5 … Ty Cobb 109.8 … Willie Mays 111.8 … Barry Bonds 116.5 … Stan Musial 116.8 … Albert Pujols 117.6 … Lou Gehrig 118.5 … Jose Ramirez 118.7 … Tris Speaker 120.8 … Jimmie Foxx 121.1 … Mike Schmidt 121.8 … Wade Boggs 126.1 … Honus Wagner 128.0 … Ken Griffey 128.8 … Alex Rod 129.8 … Chase Utley 130.9 … Joe DiMaggio 133.7 … Johnny Mize 136.4 … Rickey Henderson 138.1 … Arky Vaughan 140.8 …… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

PaWaa 7000 77.1 … Babe Ruth 94.0 … Rogers Hornsby 97.0 … Ted Williams 102.5 … Mike Trout 104.2 … Ty Cobb 105.6 … Mickey Mantle 106.8 … Willie Mays 107.9 … Honus Wagner 108.1 … Barry Bonds 111.2 … Albert Pujols 117.1 … Stan Musial 117.3 … Lou Gehrig 117.6 … Mike Schmidt 124.5 … Rickey Henderson 125.3 … Tris Speaker 125.4 … Alex Rod 135.2 … Joe DiMaggio 135.3 … Jimmie Foxx 135.4 … Hank Aaron 136.4 … Wade Boggs 139.6 … Joe Morgan 142.4 … Ken Griffey 143.4 … Mel Ott 145.7 … George Brett 150.6 …… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

PaWaa 8000 79.1 … Babe Ruth 93.7 … Rogers Hornsby 96.1 … Ted Wiliams 101.5 … Willie Mays 103.9 … Ty Cobb 108.6 … Mickey Mantle 109.2 … Barry Bonds 109.2 … Honus Wagner 115.4 … Lou Gehrig 121.0 … Stan Musial 121.5 … Albert Pujols 123.4 … Mike Schmidt 124.7 … Tris Speaker 128.7 … Rickey Henderson 132.4 … Alex Rod 133.4 … Jimmie Foxx 133.8 … Hank Aaron 141.7 … Joe Morgan 142.5 … Mel Ott 148.3 … Eddie Mathews 155.0 … Wade Boggs 156.3 … George Brett 157.2 … Ken Griffey 161.6 … Cal Ripken 161.9 …… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Voomo: A Herculean accomplishment. And the result shows players from all eras sprinkled through the ascending ratings. If you tried this with pitchers, it would not be so. Owing to the current trend of pulling starters in the sixth inning more or less, the figures skew in their favor dramatically, at least in a simpler formation of pWAR/ IP. Dead ball era pitchers also have an advantage. In other words, your version for position players is useful as a means to evaluate players across eras, but I think that if you would apply it to pitchers, you would find that… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
5 months ago

Of course I disagree! . . . But I need a while to figure out some basis for it. I just hope the reason you expected me to wasn’t because of my comic distortion of your term “nuance” to try to spice up repeating my same old arguments for Bobbly Wallace. We should absolutely go beyond single-stat reductions and look at complexes of skills and contexts. I wasn’t making fun of you, I was making fun of how much I’ve been repeating myself (and to such little effect!). I was once on top of what WAR crunched but those days… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob:  Your screed on Wallace had nothing to do with my closing remark. We’d sparred about WAR applications in the long ago past, so I took a preemptive shot, rather than waiting. PART ONE Ed Lopat versus Johan Santana: Both were successful playing for good teams. Lopat was successful playing for some bad White Sox teams before going to the Yanks, and Santana was successful for some bad Mets teams after leaving the Twins. IP 2439—2025 W 166—139 L 112-78 ERA 3.21—3.20 ERA+ 116—136 GS 318—284 CG 164—15 H/9 9.1—7.7 HR/9 0.7—1.0 SO% 8.4—24.1 BB% 6.4—6.9 pWAR/ IP: .0116—.0251 Question: Santana… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
4 months ago

A continuation of the above: PART THREE Dead ball circa 1890-1919 C. Young .0225 K. Nichols .0229 C. Mathewson .0209 E. Plank .0195 R. Waddell .0206 J. Mcginnity .0180 A. Joss .0205 M. Brown .0180 E. Walsh .0215 W. Johnson .0258 G. Alexander .0224 (Half dead ball, half live ball) Live ball circa 1920-1950 notables U. Shocker .0205 D. Vance .0212 L. Grove .0287 D. Dean .0223 (1967 IP) H. Brecheen .0217 (1907 IP) C. Hubbell .0192 H. Newhouser .0201 R Faber .0156 T. Lyons .0161 L. Gomez .0173 B. Feller .0170 R. Ruffing .0127 W. Ferrell .0186 W. Hoyt… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago

No rip! This is great work, nsb. Here’s a first reaction: It appears from this analysis that the reason starter pWAR is distributed unevenly across eras may be, in part, because of shifts in the distribution of activity on the diamond. That is, in certain eras, because of the style of play, pitchers shoulder more of the work, and thus FIP grabs a larger share of the statistical credit. You essentially made this point in your Lopat/Santana contrast (what a well chosen match-up!). When Lopat spreads the work among fielders it may yield the same number of wins, but the… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
5 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Using Voomo’s formula for the position players on the current ballot, this is what I get: 192.2 Utley (7839) 193.6 Rolen (8518) 222.3 Allen (7315) 262.1 Randolph (9461) 272.5 Minoso (7712 – MLB only; 290.9 [8232] total) 275.2 Wallace (9631) 283.9 Helton (9453) 307.1 Guerrero (9059) 421.0 Sheffield (10947) 499.6 Ortiz (10091) 509.7 Simmons (9685) I also tried to level the playing field and ran the figures using Utley’s PA total as a base. I looked for the season cutoff closest to 7839 PA and calculated the number: 180.0 Rolen (7919) 192.2 Utley [7839] 216.9 Helton (7764) 222.3 Allen [7315]… Read more »

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
5 months ago

Question #11: Not sure if he is first, but one of the three pitchers ahead of Rodríguez is Camilo Pascual, whose ERA+ improved 48 points from his first three seasons to his next three (72 to 120).

Doug
Doug
5 months ago
Reply to  Scary Tuna

Not Pascual. Someone much more recent.

Hint is he logged a bit more than half of Pascual’s innings and earned a bit more than half of Pascual’s WAR. Their career IP to WAR ratios are within 2% of each other.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
5 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Another pitcher ahead of Rodriguez, but not first, is Bill Swift who went from 86 to 132 for 46 points of improvement.

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

I had considered this pitcher previously but apparently neglected to check his numbers: Jake Arrieta improved dramatically upon joining the Cubs once the Orioles traded him after 3-1/2 seasons. His ERA+ went from 79 in seasons 1-3 to 152 over the next three campaigns.

Doug
Doug
4 months ago
Reply to  Scary Tuna

Arrieta is correct. His 12-year career broken down into 3 year chunks looks like this:
Year 1-3, 79 ERA+
4-6, 152
7-9, 120
10-12, 77

So, a 30+ point change in ERA+ each time. Likely very few (if any) similar careers.

Doug
Doug
4 months ago

As it stands now, there are 7 players tied for the lead, but with only two votes. Rather than a 7-way runoff, I’m going to extend the election for another week in the hope that we will get a few more voters to weigh in.

Previously cast ballots may now be changed up until this coming Friday. Note also the addition of Brandon Webb to the ballot, whom I had missed in preparing the post. Thanks to Opal for pointing out this omission.

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Doug, as the site admin, do you have access to all the emails of folks who have voted over the years?
And if so, it it in integrity to message everybody that we are having an active vote? We dont have a “subscription” option on this site.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Wow. Say hi to Andy! It’s been a long time.

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago

Main: Allen, Rolen, Simmons
Secondary: Williams, Coveleski, Reggie Smith

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago

Since we’ve got some extra time, I thought I’d do a version of something I used to do back in the day and list all of our candidates—on both lists—according to a formulation that’s a little different from usual. In this case, for position players, the candidates are listed according to PA/WAR (productivity)—lower numbers better, as in Voomo’s PA/WAA—and their career magnitude, expressed as “Irvins”—that is, their total PAs expressed as a multiple of Monte Irvin’s total PAs, the lowest magnitude on the list (this includes all of his PAs, including his ten Negro League seasons, but because the Negro… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Thanks, Doug. Didn’t think to add him.

The super-efficient pitchers are top relievers:

23……..0.6…Mariano
33……..0.4…Wagner (not Honus)

no statistician but
no statistician but
4 months ago

While I have some time, I’m going to point out something that Bob Eno, for all his enthusiasm about Bobby Wallace, has somehow not exactly downplayed, but mentioned only in passing. Wallace was a darn good hitter for his era. His 56.8 Batting WAR in the dead ball era is a commendable in ways we may not really grasp now, or not easily. He was anything but a power hitter, and was middling at best at working the pitcher for a walk. Nevertheless he had 6 top-10 finishes in the offensive WAR category and 8 top-10 finishes in RBIs. Hitting… Read more »

Doug
Doug
4 months ago

To your point, for the 16 years he played regularly (1897-1912), Wallace ranked 4th in oWAR, 3rd in WAR and 2nd in dWAR. So, not just a defensive wizard. Here’s the list.

no statistician but
no statistician but
4 months ago

I generally don’t vote, preferring to be a commentator, although I did vote once in order to break a senseless impending tie. That being said, I would like to vote for Wallace. Problem: the rules require a ballot of three choices, and I don’t have strong positive opinions about anyone else listed. Negative opinions, several: Simmons, Ortiz and all of the first timers except Santana. Sentimentally, I’d love to vote for Minoso, but I can’t see him as being any better than his contemporary Larry Doby, who isn’t even on the secondary ballot. I would vote for Ashburn, Irvin, or… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago

I remember that previous departure from form, nsb, and I appreciate the vote for Wallace. I hadn’t registered that Doby was now absent. I’d like to propose a particular form of a Redemption Round that would apply to him. B-Ref has now incorporated Negro League stats with MLB ones (I don’t know how Stathead and FanGraphs handle this, cause my stat nerd days are over). The Negro League stats don’t represent full value because the records are only partial, but that may be ok because we don’t have clear measures of quality for Negro Leagues either. When we initially assessed… Read more »

Last edited 4 months ago by Bob Eno
Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Yeah, after doing a check I see you’re right. Some guys I thought might do well didn’t have the MLB minimum for the Circle, and the Negro League WAR numbers are partial enough that they can only supplement a case. Paige and Campanella benefit a lot, but they’re already in. Irvin and Doby are the only ones I found where the numbers really make a difference for a qualifying player. Jim Gilliam might have, but his Negro League records are too fragmentary. (Maybe Hank Thompson.)

Anyway, Doby’s case for redemption is still strengthened by the new numbers.

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago

Is #13 Clay Kershaw? He had a non-qualified season to start his career of 98 ERA+ and then reeled off seven in a row at a 162 clip

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

It looks like it’s Mordecai Brown.

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago

My mistake. I took “modern era” to be post-deadball (1920-present) – as opposed to 1900-present.

Doug
Doug
4 months ago

Brown is correct. He extended that streak beginning his career to 8 straight qualified seasons (1903-10) with 125 ERA+.

Doug
Doug
4 months ago

One more quiz question on the board, concerning Dan Johnson. Not surprised it’s the last question, since this player’s career was so inconsequential it seems a miracle he lasted 10 seasons, especially since the last six were in his 30s. Johnson’s counting stats are underwhelming, as would be expected from a career of fewer than 500 games and 1500 AB. But he does seem to have had a few valuable skills, with a career 13% walk rate and 4% (of AB) homer rate, the latter translating into a blast every week to 10 days if he were playing everyday. He… Read more »

Last edited 4 months ago by Doug
Richard Chester
Richard Chester
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Ralph Houk spent 7 consecutive seasons with the Yankees with fewer than 30 games played and he had 6 consecutive seasons with fewer than 10 games played.

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago

Funny, the first guy I checked was Charlie Silvera. Charlie got some WS $$ 1949-1953

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

During Silvera’s tenure with the Yankees (1948-1956) his career BA was .291. The only AL catcher with a higher BA with at least 400 plate appearances was Yogi with .294.

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

15 years at AAA. Over 5,000 PA. .302 / .376 / .495 / .871

Morman must have wondered what coulda been had he been given the chance.

He was blocked in Chicago by a rapidly declining Greg Walker, blocked in KC by the tail end of Brett, then continued to mash at AAA, but even the expansion Marlins didnt see investing time into a mid-30s journeyman…

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
4 months ago

Main: Wallace, Randolph, Santana.
Secondary: Ashburn, Coveleski, Irvin.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago

It looks to me as though Wallace has entered the Circle and we’ve likely completed our work with regard to the Deadball Era.

Doug
Doug
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Perhaps we’re through.

There are still a few players from the dead ball era that could perhaps be considered in our next redemption round. See the lists below:
Everyday players
Pitchers

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Half a dozen guys on those lists with as much argument as most of our current group.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

I agree, Voomo. I somehow had a comment deleted just now, but the gist was that although there are viable candidates on Doug’s list, the nature of the conversation here has changed. It used to be that the old-time players came to our attention in the context of their birth-year pool. Wallace came up when HHS was focused, round after round, on late 19th century / early 20th century players, so Wallace’s career had context. And conversation was much more detailed then. I went back to look at the 1873 round when Wallace appeared, that was in 2015. You were… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
4 months ago

I’m kind of lukewarm about the prospect of an additional number of, at best, borderline names on the COG candidate role. Fred Clarke is actually a superior candidate to any we now have, according to YT, but otherwise . . . ? In its inception, the COG was supposed to be more selective than the HOF. That’s one point. A well-known weaker one—but I’m mentioning it anyway—is that the HOF has done a miserable job in its selection, which irks the heck out of me. This is no solution, but I’m going to name the players currently in neither Circle… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago

To respond to your last question, nsb, and granting your premise that all of these players deserve to be in the Hall (which is reasonable), I wonder whether a contributing reason is the growth in the overall size of the player pool. In 1960 there were 16 teams; by 1978 there were 28. That’s a pretty sudden increase of ~75% in the number of regulars playing. I think Hall judgments are, in practice, about both absolute and relative quality, and the relative elements kept many BBWAA voters from expanding their ballots towards the full ten available slots. It’s only recently… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob, Not to be that guy but, the NL didn’t expand to 14 teams until FLA and COLO were brought in 1993….. I can’t disagree with NSB’s picks. Just wondering if Boyer is on the list if Allen (or Callison) wins the NL MVP award as a rookie in 1964 in lieu of Ken. You know, if Mauch doesn’t panic and pitch Bunning and Short every other day, the Phillies probably take the pennant and Kenny finishes behind Callison or Allen. Also, without the advanced defensive metrics we have today, is Hernandez considered a Hall of Famer by the balloteers… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Right, Paul. I was moving fast and my mind is slow. So a ~62.5% increase.

My girlfriend in ’64 was from Philly. Man, that was painful! In the losing streak Callison batted .275 and Allen .415, but Callison surely did lose to Boyer because of the streak. (The entire MVP vote looks awful, though, as MVP votes sometimes do. You may not like WAR, but the fact that Mays had almost twice the WAR of both Boyer and Callison, the 1-2 finishers, says a lot.)

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Yes, Callison (20) and Boyer (22) had about 40% of the Rbat of Mays (53), Allen (52), and Santo (52). You really gotta believe in the power of the glove to justify Boyer and Callison as 1-2 in the MVP voting. Like, was Boyer getting to 6 batted balls/9 innings? hahaha. Did Callison throw out 40 baserunners? They were both great fielders but, obviously, pennant standings and RBI won the prize

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Yup. Boyer was particularly known for his fielding. It surely made a difference in the voting. As it happens, both Boyer at third and Callison in right had 1.0 dWAR that year. Fine figures. Mays’s dWAR in center that year was 2.0 (but who’s counting?).

Basically, Mays won two MVPs instead of ten because his consistency blinded voters. If Mays had had some bad years to highlight his good ones he’d have won more. He led the Majors in WAR eight times, and six of those were with >10.0.

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

same deal with Mantle. Best player in the AL from about 1954 – 1964 and won 3 MVP’s. Mays definitely should have won in 1962 but sportwriters were thrilled with Wills stealing bases

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Well . . . Mantle was terrific. But he had a total of 5 seasons above 7.0 WAR (1955-61) to Mays’s 13 (1954-66), and Mantle led the AL 6 times while Mays led the Majors 8 times (with 2 more in just the NL). Yet Mantle out MVP’d Mays. The BBWAA ignored one of Mantle’s >10.0 WAR seasons because Maris hit 61 HRs, just as Wills’ 104 SB season put Mays’s >10.0 WAR in the shade. But the writers passed Mays by for three other such seasons (all Majors-leading). Here’s a fun fact I just discovered. Mays finally won his… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

I think we may have already had the Mantle vs. Mays discussion a few years back. IIRC, I believe the Runs Created per 27 Outs Made favored Mantle to such an extent that you may have been incredulous? A team of Mantles versus Willies? On another note, Mantle has three seasons of oRAR of 108 or greater; Mays has zero greater than 90….But, alas, Mays had the good fortune of never being seriously injured. Mantle’s injuries were legendary

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

You may be right, Paul. I don’t recall (correctly or incorrectly), but it sounds like me. And it’s absolutely true that the endurance of Mantle’s dominance was limited by his injuries. Mays stayed healthy (alas?–I was a Brooklyn fan and I was glad to admire Mays), although he lost more than a season and a half to military service. But I don’t think the comparison holds up in the context of the MVP discussion. MVPs are about total contribution, not hitting alone. Mantle was a below average center fielder with only five seasons of positive dWAR and never above 1.1;… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Replying to my own message because one point really has been bothering me. I wrote, “Mantle was a below average center fielder . . .” Mantle’s Rfield and dWAR numbers are negative, even if you isolate his peak career (1952-64). He places in the top-ten in Total Zone runs for OF only once–5th in 1955–while Mays is a perennial top-five, second lifetime in CF to Andrew Jones (Mantle isn’t on the top-400 list). But here’s the thing: I saw Mantle play dozens of times and he was terrific in center field. When I report that he was a below-average fielder… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

For this reason, I have a hard time buying into defensive arguments for old time players based upon the advanced numbers we have, which are mostly based on total chances, total put outs.
These involve some factors beyond the player’s control.

I trust Bob’s eye test more than DRS.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Yeah, but then I lose the argument!

I’ve worn glasses since I was eight. Maybe that was actually Bauer. The sun was in my eyes.

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

The problem I have with the current fielding metrics is the fact that someone is watching somewhere deciding whether that ball that Alec Bohm didn’t get to is a ball that Chapman or Austin Riled field cleanly. It just seems a little too subjective to me. On the other hand, Runs Created or Offensive Winning Percentage (and most of the offensive stats) seem like pretty clear-cut, verifiable, makes-sense kind of calculations. If you took the worst fielders at each position with over 7,000 career plate appearances and they played the best fielders at each position with a neutral pitching staff,… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

I think this is intuitively obvious, Paul, but not necessarily correct. Towards the end of my immersion in stats (probably around early 2019) I became very interested in the value of fielding that contemporary stats seemed to reveal. I was on this site pushing out stuff I was reading in annual editions of The Fielding Bible (which I gather has since become a fully web-based entity). The methodologies were rapidly advancing with statcast replacing more subjective measures. While we can’t read back what these measures do when applied to the bare stats of historical players, what they do illustrate is… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,

Hornsby or Maz?
Frank Thomas or Keith Hernandez?
Mike Piazza or JIm Sundberg?
Allen or Brooks?
Mantle or Garry Pettis, Devon White?
Frank Howard vs. Roy White?
I’ll take Chipper Jones and you can have Chapman….Though, I really do like your Ozzie vs. Jeter comparison – anything to knock the halo off that guy’s head.

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

You do realize the hitters would score seven runs/game versus league average pitching, right?

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Paul, I think you’re just building on the traditional view. Hornsby or Maz is super easy: Hornsby was a good fielder and Maz was a lousy hitter. Hernandez was an average fielder at a low-impact position; of course you’d take Thomas. Piazza was a slightly below average catcher and Sundberg a lousy hitter. Here’s a better comparison: the Boyer brothers. Ken had a 115 OPS+ Clete 86 OPS+: about equidistant in opposite directions. Both were third basemen. Ken was a very good fielder but Clete was state of the art–Clete produced about 1.1 more dWAR per 162 games. How much… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

To your point that the trend towards TTO is diminishing the value of fielding, teams struck out once more per nine innings in 2000 than they did in 1985, which has to be accounted for in the Jeter/Oz comp.

That number has, of course, skyrocketed since then. There are simply fewer opportunities to go around.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

True, Voomo. That won’t apply to Mays vs. Mantle, but you’re correct that there was about a 10% rise in the number of strikeouts from the heart of Oz’s career to the heart of Jeter’s, so that’s not the best comparison. Let’s do this comparison. Oz vs. Barry Larkin, rough contemporaries. Larkin’s OPS+ is 116, Oz’s is 87 (just the difference between the Boyer brothers). Larkin was an average-fielding shortstop (lifetime Rfield +18) and Ozzie was the best (+239). Using the rough measure of TB/G, I find Larkin producing 0.42 more bases per game. Using the rough measure of Chances/G*Pct… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Well, 0.70 per game is significant. If 2 out of every three games Ozzie prevented a single (maybe double) that Barry let slip through, that is huge. Lets look at their teams’ pitching stats. Ive picked Ozzie’s 1989 (his best defensive year, with 32 rField), and Barry’ 1990 (also a good year, with 10 rField). They both played 150+ games in those years. Ozzie had 483 assists Barry had 469 assists (leading the league) Ozzie was part of 73 double plays. Barry, 86 So, already, Im not clear how Oz gets a 32 and Larkin only a 10. Let’s look… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Voom,
Thank you for explaining, in a nutshell, HTF we are supposed to have faith in any defensive metrics beyond assists, putouts, and double plays.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Paul, The only stats I’m using are chances, consisting of assists, putouts, and errors.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Very interesting, Voomo. Where did you find that ground ball data? I’m unable to locate it. That’s a big discrepancy. It’s also true that Ozzie had fewer, not more, chances in 1989 than Larkin had in 1990. There are two aspects to the argument you make: 1) Rfield/Rtot are not transparent and don’t seem to make sense; 2) Ozzie’s range factor superiority is due, in substantial part, to playing behind ground-ball, lower-K pitchers. My comparison between the two players was for lifetime measures concerning TB and Chances*Pct. If you use those calculations for OZ-89 vs. Larkin-90, Larkin comes out ahead.… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno
Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Thanks, Voomo. I remember seeing these pages now, but I don’t even know how to navigate to them properly.

It seems to me that the key figure to look at would be the number of balls hit up the middle by a right-handed batter; that is, towards SS. Ozzie ’89 still gets more than Larkin ’90, but the margin is small: 1182 to 1136.

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob, Just a few thoughts: 1) There wasn’t a GM alive who would trade Ken Boyer for his brother 2) Hernandez was probably the greatest fielding 1B of the last 50 years 3) Piazza vs. Sundberg? Yes, that was the whole idea of the discussion – the best hitting piss-poor fielder vs. the best-fielding piss-poor hitter at each position 4) If the average 3B gets 4.25 PA’s/game vs 3.25 chances/game, which is more critical to team success? Then throw in a .920 FP for the hitter versus .960 for the Gold-Glover and you’re talking about 22 chances that are errors… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Well, let me try to reply in series, Paul. 1) Yes, my whole point is that we’re now able to understand the importance of fielding far better than GMs could in the 1960s. You’re articulating the traditional judgment (which I shared till a few years ago) and I’m trying to challenge it, so invoking the traditional judgment isn’t actually relevant. 2) Ok. I passed over 1B simply because I think fielding is much less important there. I don’t know to what extent I’d press the argument for 1B. 3) That’s not the argument I’m making. I’m making the argument that… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob, 1) In Clete’s best stretch of 1157 games/4532 plate appearances he accumulated 3.3 WAR per 650 plate appearances. Ken managed a stretch of 1084 games/4634 plate apearances that averaged 6.3 WAR per 650 PA’s. If you wish to do Clete’s peak, in 306 games/1212 PA’s, he average 4.5 WAR per 650 PA’s. Ken averaged 5.0 WAR for every 659 PA’s for his ENTIRE career….So, as mentioned previously, NO genearl manager in his right mind would trade Kenny for Cletis. 2) Yes, and my point is 3B isn’t as important as anyone thinks either. Take the hitter… 3) If you… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

1) I completely agree that no GM would have traded Kenny for Clete and have already said as much. 2) I understand what point you want to make. 3) Ok. 4) Well, the difference Voomo cited turned out to be not quite the scale his initial stat indicated. As I wrote in a reply to you above, I’m not basing anything I’ve written on arcane stats. I’m using PO+A+E (Chances and Fielding Pct.). Paul, my thinking was identical to yours until I began reading in detail about these issues in 2018. I suppose I could go back and search for… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Yankees up the middle during their 4 Championships in 5 years:

rField

-6, 7, -4, 1 Girardi/Posada
-3, -4, -15, -10 Duncan/Knoblauch
-14, 2, -11, -23 Past A Diving Jeter
-14, -14, -16, -3 Bernie

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

I guess the bats carried the day…..

Tom
Tom
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

I’ll take umbrage at Piazza’s defense described as piss-poor. If you wanted a proper comparison, you should have provided Victor Martinez v Sundberg. While Piazza was overall just below league average in b-r stats (career 1.5 dWAR), he was a good defender as a Dodger. Look at 1993: 1.8 dWAR. He twice led the league in assists, and 4 times in putouts, once in C range factor, once in fielding %, and even in caught stealing (1993). Yes, he was terrible at throwing out runners, but that is just one phase of a catcher’s job. He was outstanding at several… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Tom

Tom,
Umbrage noted. I believe, like Ted Simmons, Piazza’s offense was so superior that he was perceived as below average behind the plate. But, yeah, Piazza, is by any measure, the greatest hitting catcher of all time. I would have traded Karros and put Piazza on 1b to make sure he played 155+ games every year…..

Tom
Tom
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Remember that as a Dodger rookie, Piazza had an outstanding defensive season. His throwing problems got exploited after the season, but throughout his Dodger years, the other aspects of his defense were good to outstanding. Dodger pitchers loved throwing to him, and not just because of his offense. Piazza was a first baseman in college. His pre-draft scouting report said that “he had “very little defensive ability at that position.” He was famously drafted only as a favor to Tommy LaSorda, who promised the FO that Piazza could catch. Piazza did play some 1B in the minors, but not nearly… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Tom

Tom, regarding the ‘poster boy’ thing, did not Piazza sing in a metal band that played the California beach towns bars in places like Manhattan Beach, Huntington and Long Beach? Don’t recall if Karros fancied himself a musician as well. With the way the LAD spend money nowadays, what were they thinking when they couldn’t extend Piazza? Was that his agent’s doing? I’d venture a guess that if you’ve got an average defensive catcher who is a well above average hitter, you’re gonna be better than .500 year-in/year-out through out that receiver’s career…..I certainly thought Piazza would have won an… Read more »

Tom
Tom
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

For a while, Piazza constantly popped up on metal shows, singing backup or playing drums for a song, he even sang backup vocals on a Black Label Society song – Stronger Than Death. In New York, he was a frequent guest at rock radio shows. I never heard of Karros doing anything like that. Both sides are to blame for that contract fiasco, Fox didn’t want to be the first to sign a player to a 9 figure deal. SoFox execs bypassed the GM and made that huge trade. Then a few months later, they signed a pitcher to the… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Tom

Thanks – 7 years, $ 91M seems relatively fair since a few of those seasons were top 5 in salary per B-R. I can only imagine what he may have hit in a bandbox…in lieu of Dodger Stadium or Shea

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Actually, .321/.388/.572 on the road versus .294/.364/.515 in places like LA, Shea, Oakland

Doug
Doug
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Fascinating discussion here. I’m certainly in the “fielding is undervalued” camp. The logic seems inescapable, ergo you can only score if you get on base, so every extra out not only eliminates the possibility of that player scoring, it also eliminates or significantly reduces the probability of scoring for runners already on base and for batters still to come in the inning. More subjectively, if you watch a team everyday or nearly so, the difference between an elite fielder and an average fielder becomes very obvious, and the difference between the former and a poor fielder is massive. The other… Read more »

Last edited 4 months ago by Doug
Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

I would argue against Fielding being slump-proof.
That hitter who is in a slump because:

  • his mechanics are off
  • he is working through an injury
  • his family life is going through a stressful period
  • he is thinking too much because he is in a slump
  • he is a marginal player struggling to stay in the show and now the slump is making him think he will be teaching high school gym in two years…

… All of these factors dont go away when that same guy puts down the bat and puts on a glove.

Doug
Doug
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Point taken. OTOH, a player might respond to a batting slump by saying to himself “I’m not helping the team with my bat right now, so I’ll bear down and really keep my head in the game to try to help more with my glove”. Would be interesting to do a study and find out if there is a significant correlation between fielding and hitting slumps. Subjectively, just based on observation, if there is such a correlation, it doesn’t seem very strong. Hitters rarely go on hot streaks for more than a couple of weeks before cooling off; if a… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

I think there’s more to Doug’s observation than a matter of funk-related slumps. Batting skills are fundamentally different from fielding and baserunning skills. The latter have more to do with trained athleticism: speed, arm strength, agility. These tend to be relatively invariable. There’s certainly overlap: both batters and fielders need concentration and quick reflexes, and batters benefit from intrinsic qualities like size and strength. But I think a much larger proportion of fielding skills involve fluid adaptations of basic trained motor modules in a context that allows more time for action adjustment. Moreover, a batter swings and fails to put… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Yes, I actually agree with all that. I’ve mostly been taking an opposing argument to keep this conversation going.

And Ive been thinking about Knoblauch, too.
Still bothers me, 22+ years later, that in what was to be the final at bat of his career, in Game 7 of the World Series, that Paul O’Neill was pinch hit for………… by Knoblauch.

And by the way, the year before, 2000, when Knobs last played 2nd base and had those Yips, according to DRS he was still better than Jeter.

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Voomo,
“And by the way, the year before, 2000, when Knobs last played 2nd base and had those Yips, according to DRS he was still better than Jeter.”

You are officially the world’s finest “Halo Knocker-Off-er” on the surface of planet Earth. Thanks again for keeping it very real

Tom
Tom
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Don’t forget the Yips.
They can seemingly strike out of nowhere.

Tom
Tom
4 months ago
Reply to  Tom

nevermind, didn’t see the conversation below.

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

Doug, I would suspect that fielding skills don’t age as well as batting skills. I’d be willing to bet that young elite fielders at critical positions (SS, 2B, CF) become league average at their position way sooner than elite hitters (at corner OF and IF) become league average (if ever). Further, an investment in a slugging 3B in free agency at say age 29 or 30 is a better buy than the Chapman-type who hits OK and , supposedly, fields well. Chapman, however, is a bad example as his skills at the plate are dissipating rapidly….How many fans can take… Read more »

Doug
Doug
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Another good point. Suspect you’re right about skills dissipation being more pronounced defensively than offensively. Will try to buttress that suspicion with some stats.

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

I can still hit the crap out of a pickleball, but I can get up off the ground without using my hands anymore.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

I’m not sure I see the relevance of any of this. We’re talking about the importance of fielding, not particular position players. If a good young fielder becomes a bad old fielder it has no implication for the importance of fielding, same for poor fielders who become worse. If his bat is good, move him to LF, 1B, or DH. If his bat isn’t good and no other team would find him an upgrade it’s time to audition for ESPN.

Doug’s point about consistency was clearly in a single-season context.

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob,
GM’s make investments in players. The point is that if a player’s skill set fades sooner than another’s (like fielding faster than slugging), he’s not worth the investment or as large an investment as the other player.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

I understand that, Paul. And you’ve used the GM perspective several times. I just don’t see the relevance to the general question of the value of fielding skills in baseball. We began by talking about their impact on post facto MVP assessments, and the only issues concerning long term value were also retrospective: e.g., whether Mays’s overall value was boosted enough by fielding to overcome Mantle’s. Our conversations on HHS are almost always retrospective, about actual stats, not prospective. Which isn’t to say your point isn’t interesting in itself. But there’s no contradiction between the Fielding Bible premise that fielding… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob, It’s nuanced. Who else would really have a ‘dog in the hunt’/’skin in the game’ other than GM’s, ownership/management? As fans we are mere pimples on the gluteae maximae of a long history of obeisance being totally subject to the whims and decisions of management /ownership. As far as Mays and Mantle, Mick was significantly better as a hitter due to the extent of their differences in OBA. Mays was a better fielding CF than everyone from about 1954-1970 and was probably unmatched in sheer efficiency until guys like Maddox and Gary Pettis came along. As far as hitting… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

GMs and owners are asking different questions from the ones we ask, Paul. It’s fine to consider their perspective, but those perspectives are based on future bets; we assess outcomes. I don’t have any objection to your interest in the GM perspective; it’s just not relevant to the issues I was raising. And as far as relative importance of GMs and fans: no fans, no GMs. (And you, after all, are making your judgments as a fan, not an actual GM, who would be factoring in budgets, pre-existing player contracts, draft-pick tradeoffs, regular-season/post-season strength, and, of course, the market implications… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Rfield….dWAR…..Assists……Rtot…….Errors…….Putouts 1962-’65
55…………3.3………91………….55……….19…………1263……Callison
40…………1.9………59………….42……….39…………1086……Clemente

I imagine one could make the argument that the assists totals reflect the “newness” of Callison to the NL and the “fear” of Clemente’s arm but, the other stuff, I dunno

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

GGs are awarded on an annual basis, Paul. Rfield 62 / 63 / 64 / 65 Callison……15 / 18 / 15 / 7 Clemente….15 / 0 / 8 / 17 I asked you whether you meant 63-64 rather than 62-65, and said ‘62 seems a toss-up and in ’65 I’m not sure why you’d choose Callison. As that indicates, I think the evidence says Callison should have won GGs in 63-64, not in ’65, and I have no idea about ’62. I also have no idea why you’ve conflated the four years. But, as I also wrote, I think the… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Conflated to emphasize Callison’s statistical superiority to the legend….
but, alas, here’s 1965 broken out beyond “Rfield:

Innings….Assists….Errors….Field%….RF/9…..NL%….NL RF/9
1,390……..21………….6……….983……..2.19….975……..1.95…Callison
1,264……..15…………10………967……..2.09….975……..1.95…Clemente

Somehow, Clemente garners more Rfield (17-7). Perhaps, PIT had a ground-ball inducing staff? Clemente took fly balls from Virdon? Or, vice versa? This, to me, seems a lot like Voomo’s Larkin 1990 vs. Ozzie 1990.

Doug
Doug
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Don’t know if it explains anything, but here are some pitching comparisons for the 1965 season.
Ground Outs to Air Outs: PIT 1.34 (1st in NL), PHI 1.13 (T-5th)
HR%: PIT 1.5% (1st – lowest), PHI 1.9% (2nd)
XBH%: PIT 5.1% (1st – lowest), PHI 6.4% (6th)
XBH/H: PIT .24 (T-1st, lowest), PHI .28 (4th)
Balls in Play%: PIT 75% (T-1st, highest), PHI 71% (T-8th)
SO%: PIT 14.4% (8th – highest), PHI 17.2% (4th)
Double Play%: PIT 14% (1st – highest), PHI (11%, T-2nd)
Unaccounted PA: PIT 348 (10th – lowest), PHI 0 (T-1st)

Paul E
Paul E
4 months ago
Reply to  Doug

In lieu of percentages, are there any specific numbers associated with these events available? Forbes Field was 457′ to CF and Connie Mack Stadium was 447′ IIRC. I believe, off the top of my head 366′ to RF at Forbes and 329′ to RF at Connie Mack. But, I don’t know how, exactly, that would impact Rfield 🙁

Doug
Doug
4 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Those numbers are from B-R (not Stathead) so visible to all. Go to https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NL/1965.shtml and hover over “Pitching” and you’ll see a bunch of options that you can click. The above numbers were from “Pitching Ratios”. Raw numbers are under “Batting Against”. Park-level data can be found under “League Splits”.

Park factors for all games pitched (Home and Away) are under “Value”, The Phils and Bucs ranked 3rd and 4th in most pitcher-friendly environs, behind the Dodgers and Astros.

Last edited 4 months ago by Doug
Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago

Speaking to subject of whether WAR is an effective stat for Pitchers, it would seem that park factors and defense influence this number significantly. Here are three AL Pitchers from 2023 with similar IP: 3.5 Brayan Bello 3.5 Eduardo Rod 2.2 Jon Gray This would suggest that Bello was as good as Eduardo (the Red Sox might agree, as they just gave him an extension) Here are the RA/9 numbers for each: 4.41 3.48 4.29 Doesnt begin to make sense until you plug in their RA9def and PPFp: -0.12 / 106.2 0.13 / 102.0 0.24 / 103.2 These def and… Read more »

Last edited 4 months ago by Voomo
Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Voomo, I’m not really sure which direction you’re taking here. We’d expect RA9def and PPFp to have an impact in a case like this. The B-R WAR formulas are applied to all pitchers. You indicate that the large scale of impact in this comparison seems excessive, but I’m not sure whether the flaw you suspect has to do with the whole enterprise of appropriately weighting pitching components and applying ground-leveling standards across teams and fields, or whether you think the counterintuitive result in this case means there must have been an error specific to this case. FanGraphs WAR for Rodriguez… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob, It was you or somebody else who recently put forward the opinion that WAR is better suited for hitters than hurlers.

I’m just wrapping my head around that concept.

The fact that b-r and fangraphs are far from consensus speaks to the one point I did make, which is that we should probably resist the lazy impulse to treat Pitching WAR as gospel.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

That was nsb, Voomo. His point was that WAR was developed for hitters and then adapted for pitchers, which might have made it less well grounded. (I knew you were picking up on that issue because I’d mis-remembered you as the person who had brought it up.) It’s a very good point to which I wrote a reply that was as long as it was uninformed. In my distant memory I seem to recall that when it came to pitching, the chief difference between WAR outcomes for B-R and FanGraphs concerned the weight given to FIP (FanGraphs gave much more).… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
4 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Voomo: I’m the villain of the piece. Bob’s the defender of what, in a very short time, has become the status quo. All the numbers are on his side because his side defines what numbers are right or relevant, not to mention how to interpret them, The Lopat-Santana comparison above basically says one of two things, that Santana was nearly two and a half times the pitcher Lopat was, or that pWAR has a lot of trouble with evaluating the true worth of pitchers who don’t meet its definition of what a pitcher ought to be, i.e., someone who’s raison… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
4 months ago

If I were in charge of a team today, I’d go against the current stream and get low strikeout pitchers. I’d build a spectacular infield defense, and get groundball pitchers who try to induce contact early in the count. The goal would be fast, fast innings. Ive never seen this studied, but I think that Time of Possession can be a factor in baseball. Meaning, just like in football, if you can keep the other team’s defense on the field, as the game wears on you gain an advantage. This may seem obvious, but I’d love to see the effects… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago

Hi nsb. It sounds to me as though you’ve actually cast a different villain, but, as I wrote before, I thought your Santana / Lopat comparison was excellent work. As Voomo says in response, it’s a great idea to have pitchers like Lopat together with spectacular defense. I absolutely agree that the 27-pitch perfect game is a better ideal than the 81-pitch version. Baseball is a team sport. But to get that result you need Lopat plus a bunch of good fielding position players, and they will deservedly share the credit for every play. A successful power pitcher may fail… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

Bob: You’re not a villain here, certainly not THE villain. I don’t think there’s villainy involved, in fact, just the obsessive nature of people who think that the map is the territory, that the figures define the game, that the schematic outline is the living reality, and that that perspective is the true one because it’s quantifiable. Reality is defined by the numbers. Biology students in high school no longer study plants and animals; they study biochemistry. They don’t learn to appreciate birds or trees or even fungi; living creatures might as well be rocks or gasses. Science and technology,… Read more »

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago

It’s not as bleak as that, nsb. I’m sure of it. In the late ’50s and early ’60s, when I’d actually go to the park to watch the Yankees and later the Mets (Brooklyn abandoned me after a single trip to Ebbets Field), feeling that my spiritual welfare depended on the outcome of each game and shouting myself hoarse, what I’d do on the other days is probably what you did too: pore over the daily box scores, tables of league leaders, or, on Sunday, the wonderful, endless stats of every player on track for a qualifying season. I’d fill… Read more »

DanMac
DanMac
4 months ago
Reply to  Bob Eno

What I see as different today is that those who control the game want to change it. Like much else, tradition is in their crosshairs. So, sadly the game we grew to love may be gone for a very long time; maybe forever.

DanMac
DanMac
4 months ago

Those who think “the map is the territory” have been promoted to the default position. It didn’t happen by accident. De-humanizing the game is the intent.

Bob Eno
Bob Eno
4 months ago
Reply to  DanMac

I think it’s an error to think of this as a matter of dehumanizing or of losing the game as it should be. Baseball has never been perfectly designed. Owners have always looked for ways to draw more people to it, teams and players have always searched for undiscovered ways to gain advantages (to game the game) and some of these lower the interest of the game on the field, and this is a see-saw process. The game began with an emphasis on fielding: pitchers were restricted in their motion and the underhand throw was mandated so batters could put… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
3 months ago

https://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1961/B04300MLN1961.htm

Off the beaten path here but, in the above referenced game, Mays, Aaron, and Cepeda struck seven (7 !!) homers between them. Is this, by any chance, the most home runs hit by Hall of Famers in a single major league contest?

Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
3 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Not sure if this is the most, Paul, but when the A’s hosted the Yankees at Shibe Park on 06/03/32, all nine home runs were hit by current Hall of Famers: Gehrig (4), Ruth, Combs, Lazzeri, Cochrane, and Foxx.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PHA/PHA193206030.shtml

Paul E
Paul E
3 months ago
Reply to  Scary Tuna

Tuna,
Thanks ! Per SABR: “In Gehrig’s sixth at-bat, Al Simmons robbed him of a potential home run with a leaping catch in deep center field.”
I believe Shibe Park may have been close to 450′ to dead CF

Voomo
Voomo
3 months ago
Reply to  Paul E
Scary Tuna
Scary Tuna
3 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

SABR also cites the 468’ distance Voomo found:

https://sabr.org/gamesproj/game/june-3-1932-lou-gehrig-hits-four-home-runs-tony-lazzeri-hits-for-cycle-in-yankees-romp/

FWIW, none of the other four homer games came close to 9 HR by future HOFers (including recent occurrences, as none had many home runs from stars who might yet end up in the hall).

Had Simmons not caught up to that last drive and Gehrig recorded a 5 HR game, I wonder if another player might have equaled that total by now. With 18 four homer games, perhaps someone would have pushed further to reach five HRs, too.

Last edited 3 months ago by Scary Tuna
Voomo
Voomo
3 months ago

Just saw some great Nolan Ryan stats:

He had 198 games in which he pitched a Quality Start but did not get the win.
In those starts he was 0-107 with a 2.27 ERA, with almost 10k per 9.
____

From 1973-1991 there were 300 games in which a pitcher went 9 or more innings and allow 2 or few hits. Nolan Ryan had 26 of those.

Paul E
Paul E
3 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Saw this:
There were 8 hitters with at least 40 PA against Ryan and an OPS over .900. Here they are:

  • Dick Allen, 1.274 (3 HR, 22 BB, 11 K – .362 better than his career OPS)
  • Jack Clark, 1.070 (4/12/9 – .216 better)
  • Carl Yastrzemski, 1.069 (4/12/7 – .228 better)
  • George Hendrick, .974 (2/10/11 – .199 better)
  • Bob Horner, .967 (4/4/7 – .128 better)
  • Reggie Smith, .946 (2/5/12 – .091 better)
  • Mike Schmidt, .925 (5/21/15 – .017 better)
  • Rusty Staub, .902 (3/13/11 – .109 better)

DICK ALLEN FOR THE HALL….CIRCLE OF GREATS….HALL OF STUPENDOUS 🙁

Doug
Doug
3 months ago
Reply to  Paul E

Quite the list. Cream really does rise to the top.

no statistician but
no statistician but
3 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

And yet, Voomo, Ryan’s lack of run support wasn’t the only plague he suffered. He holds the career record (2795) for walks, 950 more than his nearest competitor. He also threw the most wild pitches (277) since 1900, his nearest competitor tossing 51 fewer in about the same number of innings. Spot checking, I can’t find any modern era pitcher with close to as many stolen bases allowed, and his stolen base percentage, 75%, is stratospheric. Another interesting stat: grand slam opportunities allowed: 509, and he apparently walked in the runner from third 47 times. Of his contemporaries with approximately… Read more »

Paul E
Paul E
3 months ago

NSB, Voomo,
Nolan Ryan may have had the greatest “12 to 6” curve ball of the last 50 years. Mike Krukow? Doc Gooden?

Voomo
Voomo
3 months ago

Ryan’s high number of bases on balls is offset by his having the lowest H/9 in history. A walk is less damaging than a single, in that baserunners can only move up one base. Zero bases if there is no force. In 1977, Ryan gave up more walks than hits, which is preposterous. 204 free passes and 198 hits in 299 innings. How do his overall numbers compare to the AL averages that year? 2.77 ERA – 3.31 RA9 – 1.344 WHIP – 0.4 HR/9 – 10.3 SO/9 4.06 ERA – 4.53 RA9 – 1.377 WHIP – 0.9 HR/9 –… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
3 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Voomo: No one would disagree that Ryan was good at what he was good at. My point was simply that blaming his mediocre W/L record in close, low scoring games entirely on lack of support doesn’t give the whole picture of Ryan in action. And as impressive as the 107 tough losses seems, it is 37% of his total losses, whereas Whitey Ford’s tough losses comprise over 39% of his total, Warren Spahn’s 40%, Pedro Martinez’s over 46%. Ryan’s quality start percentage is a fine 62%, but Ford and Spahn clock in at 64% and Martinez at 67%. The more… Read more »

Voomo
Voomo
3 months ago

Excellent. That’s actually why I posted those stats. So that someone’s smarter than me could put them into context.

no statistician but
no statistician but
3 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

Voomo:

Sarcasm is always appreciated.

Voomo
Voomo
3 months ago

That wasn’t sarcasm. I really just posted that stuff with no agenda. I live that you came up with all that context.

Voomo
Voomo
3 months ago

Footage of Honus Wagner talking. And playing at age fifty nine…

https://youtu.be/fUGIA4FLP9s?si=Rx17CakUtlMAQTZE

Paul E
Paul E
3 months ago
Reply to  Voomo

That’s Traynor leading off 3B….so, two guys from the “All-Time” Centennial Team….and Vaughan and the Waners. And a 2nd place finish in 1933.